Hard to track criticism on Syrian strike

Updated 5:48 pm, Wednesday, September 18, 2013

Now that President Barack Obama and Russian President Vladimir Putin agree on Syria, criticism is back to square one.

Now that President Barack Obama and Russian President Vladimir Putin agree on Syria, criticism is back to square one.

Photo: Pablo Martinez Monsivais, Associated Press

Hard to track criticism on Syrian strike

1 / 1

Back to Gallery

The United Nations' report on the sarin attack in Syria avoids attaching blame, but its revelations point directly at the Assad regime. And President Bashar Assad bears responsibility.

This is important because, though the Obama administration made many of these same points in pursuit of congressional authorization for a strike, most of its “proof” was in classified hearings.

And, still, delaying a strike was the correct course. However, take a look at the criticism before and following that decision. What a roller coaster.

First, the president was weak-kneed and a super-analytical ditherer for not injecting the United States more strongly on behalf of the rebels in a Syrian civil war. Let's say it again: civil war.

He was too aggressive or foolish for drawing that red line. When the administration agreed to small arms for the rebels, this was insufficient.

After the chemical attack that killed hundreds, the president was taken to task for appearing to bypass Congress for strike authorization. He sought it, and was derided as a weakling both for doing so and for the “no” vote that was likely to follow.

Most Popular

President Barack Obama was said to be “humiliated” by Russian President Vladimir Putin's embrace of an offhand remark by the secretary of state that Syria could avoid attack by giving up its chemical weapons.

Now we're back to square one with criticism that the president should be more forceful since the war has claimed some 100,000 lives. All this while most agree that “boots on the ground” are not an option.

There is room for criticism of Obama, but we have a possible solution in which Syrians give up their chemicals, avoiding a U.S. strike that could mushroom into unintended consequences. Russia and the U.S. have reached agreement — with Syria's tacit approval — that chemical weapons will be removed or destroyed by mid-2014.

This, of course, has to be closely monitored. But some might call this success — potentially.

A few sentiments occur at this point. First, hope that this dismantling actually occurs. Second, having lived with quick-on-the-trigger administrations, a belief that a go-slower approach has merit. And a sense that who the commander in chief is dictates reactions to what he does more than what he actually does.